Things that should be be standard by now.

[MysticSlayer]

I'd also like to see fading HUD as an option in every game.

Well, as an option, yeah, but personally, I like having the HUD viewable at all times. A well-made HUD doesn't clog the screen, but it does make it easy to check anything you want in an instant without having to press an extra key. Sure, it isn't the most realistic, but not all games are meant to be realistic, and I'm personally glad that is the case, because most of the "super realistic"[footnote]Gah! I hate referring to any game like that![/footnote] games aren't that fun to me.

Also, not every game has to add a full-scale body of the player. It certainly aids some games should the player's character have more complex movement in the environment, but it really doesn't add anything to games that don't use complex movement. In that case, all it does is potentially take up screen space and force the developers to use a more realistic movement system that may not fit the rest of the game.

OT: Search Bars and Sort Options in item menus as well as an ability to select all items of a specific type should there be more than one full stack. I play a lot of games where the player can spend a considerable amount of time trying to navigate a menu looking for the item they want to equip/drop/sell/etc. Allowing players to quickly search for the item or set sorting parameters so it is closer to the top would certainly help. As of right now, the best you've got is alphabetical sorting, and woe to you if the game sorts it based on the time you picked it up. It isn't necessary for games that can streamline their menu and don't bog you down with countless items. However, for some games, this is a feature I'm constantly wishing I had, especially in PC games where it would be very easy to type in whatever you want.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

And fully remappable controls. I don't care how good people say Dark Souls is, I got it, installed it, and before anything went to the controls menu. I tried to remap them to something logical, but even the controls I could remap I wasn't allowed to remap for god knows what reason, or at least not to anything logical. It received an instant uninstall there and then and has been put aside as a waste of time. If you can't make good controls yourself, allow people to remap them. If you allow people to remap them, allow them to remap them to anything. Doing any less is a tad insulting and makes me think I shouldn't have bought your game.

As far as Dark Souls goes not having re-mappable controls is the least of its problems on the PC, it was completely made to be played using a controller, and the controls actually make perfect sense on a controller. With a mouse and keyboard it's completely unplayable, not because you can't change the controls, but because the game wasn't made with a mouse in mind, and using a mouse completely breaks the targeting system in the game making it totally unplayable.

Dark Souls is definitely worth playing though, despite the fact that the PC port is dreadfully made.

 

[oversoon]

I wish Borderless Window mode was available in all the games I play. I honestly goof off in my other monitor while gaming and it's aggravating to have to minimize and have the system adjust resolution every time I do.

THIS!

You'll really want to add something to that post. Just writing "this" is considered a low content post and is subject to getting a warning on these boards.

Sorry, that's just what I tend to say when I agree with exactly what was said. That's the first time I've even been gotten on to for not using enough words.

 

[oversoon]

I'd also like to see fading HUD as an option in every game.

Well, as an option, yeah, but personally, I like having the HUD viewable at all times. A well-made HUD doesn't clog the screen, but it does make it easy to check anything you want in an instant without having to press an extra key. Sure, it isn't the most realistic, but not all games are meant to be realistic, and I'm personally glad that is the case, because most of the "super realistic"[footnote]Gah! I hate referring to any game like that![/footnote] games aren't that fun to me.

Also, not every game has to add a full-scale body of the player. It certainly aids some games should the player's character have more complex movement in the environment, but it really doesn't add anything to games that don't use complex movement. In that case, all it does is potentially take up screen space and force the developers to use a more realistic movement system that may not fit the rest of the game.

I don't see why affecting what is visible in this way inherently makes it need to be a certain kind of movement system. It's purely visual and it would add the same thing regardless of how you move. Also, what extra space do you mean? The only difference is when you look straight down you see your body instead of nothing. It doesn't clutter the screen at all or get in the way of anything.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

All games
- Mod support
- Fully remappable controls

Multiplayer shooters
- Bot tutorials for multiplayer games (also something to play with when the game inevitably dies)
- A displayable fullscreen map (of the map) when ingame
- Difficulty

Singleplayer RPG's
- No classes, or heavily modifiable ones with the potential for overlap between roles depending on how you spec
- The ability to respec your character/change appearance to some degree
- Ranged and melee weapons/abilities for everyone

 

[Azaraxzealot]

Generous checkpoints, adjustable difficulty, quicksave.

I would also like to see lives systems and permadeath (except as an optional feature) go the way of the dodo.

On another note, ALL SANDBOX GAMES (with few exceptions) SHOULD HAVE EXTENSIVE CHARACTER CUSTOMIZATION. If Saints Row 2 already showed how to do it right, everyone else should have no excuse. There is no excuse to half-ass it. Either do it right, or don't do it at all/make a different game.

EDIT: I would also like to add that a sequel should never have anything less than what its predecessor had unless the feature was universally despised. Example: every Halo game keeps removing shit, then adding more shit, then bringing back shit they removed... No, that's not how it should work. Build off of what you have, don't tear down the foundation every single time.

 

[Joccaren]

As far as Dark Souls goes not having re-mappable controls is the least of its problems on the PC, it was completely made to be played using a controller, and the controls actually make perfect sense on a controller. With a mouse and keyboard it's completely unplayable, not because you can't change the controls, but because the game wasn't made with a mouse in mind, and using a mouse completely breaks the targeting system in the game making it totally unplayable.

Dark Souls is definitely worth playing though, despite the fact that the PC port is dreadfully made.

I honestly do not see any aiming system that works with a controller not working with a mouse. One where you flick the controller and it automatically locks onto the next enemy in that direction might I guess, but that can be just as easily done via keys on the keyboard.
Even if aiming would be annoying though, I could live with it if the other controls made any sense. Few of them seem to, however, so I'm not likely to play it until either I can remap it, or I decide to purchase a controller for my PC - which'll come after my next SSD, double GPU upgrade, additional screen, new headset and 3TB drive, so at least another year or two.
If the game can't be bothered putting in the effort to be playable, I CBF putting in the effort to play it, no matter how amazing it may be.

 

[Hemingslay]

Unskippable cutscenes are a blight on galactic purity--doubly so for scenes preceding boss fights or parades of quicktime events. Wax mannikins exchanging fortune-cookie-calibre dialogue with Wiseauian delivery aren't improved by repeat viewing.

Every time someone rewatches a Resident Evil boss-battle preamble the international literacy level drops a point. The collective time humanity has lost waiting for pointless scenes to play out could have been spent completing the Sagrada Familia. Or giving Dragon Age 2 more than two interior environments. Or anything.

So, yeah. I don't care how many sleepless nights it took the animators to get Kratos' constipated scowl just right--let me skip the stupid scene already.

 

[sovietmisaki]

Seamless gamepad integration on PC, while developers are getting better at this, some faster than others (Ubisoft, I'm looking at you) a pet peeve of mine is when I have to restart the game just to get the controller working with it, and sometimes have to go into options on top of that to actually switch into controller mode. Mind you this isn't so aggravating now, although with some older games, it could lead to some tricky situations involving being able to use your kb/m or gamepad at all unless you restarted the computer entirely, if you screwed up somewhere.

Fading HUD's and an option to holster all your weapons. Given that awesome scenery is prevalent in games these days, one would think to make allow a scenic tour through a war torn city could be unobstructed without having your own weapons hogging the lower portions of your screen, especially when a lot of locations are practically wallpaper worthy.

Weapon mods, maybe not quite to Mass Effect 1's level, although having options to pick and choose your gun accessories really does help in many situations.

 

[Racecarlock]

Looks like that demon in the screenshot has a bad case of blue balls.

OT: GTA V, Y u no have warp to shore and a garage that lets me recover cars?

 

[Tayh]

Custom and manual save games.
Mouse. Mouse Scrolling support.
Quick Save/Load.
A way to skip 10+ seconds of logos and intros when starting a game.
A quick and easy way to view the game version ingame or in the launcher.
Decent console-to-PC ports.

There are other things, such as horrible gun aim controls for Dead State on the PC, and 'Smart-Button-itis' (see Mass Effect 2+3), but the list above is what annoys me the most, considering they are hardly new features.

 

[Bad Jim]

I've been wondering about this one for years now now. When I look down in real life, I see my chest. This view is clearly doable, but industry standard for first person is floating weapon, or occasionally you can see your legs.

The reason for this is that when I look down, I generally want to see what is on the ground. My body would just get in the way if it were visible. In real life I can stoop so my body does not obstruct my view, and I can shift my legs, but this would unnecessarily complicate the control scheme in a game.

If you need to look at your armour, there is normally an inventory screen for that.

Playability > immersion.

 

[MysticSlayer]

I don't see why affecting what is visible in this way inherently makes it need to be a certain kind of movement system. It's purely visual and it would add the same thing regardless of how you move. Also, what extra space do you mean? The only difference is when you look straight down you see your body instead of nothing. It doesn't clutter the screen at all or get in the way of anything.

The problem is that if the movement doesn't behave similarly to that of how people move, then it would seem awkward to anyone who happens to look down while moving, which is hardly a rare ordeal in first-person games. That's not even beginning to go into how you have to ensure there are no graphical issues with it, such as it flashing in-and-out randomly or having your weapons clipping through the body. The end result is that you want to avoid the uncanny valley, where you get close enough to reality but not exactly at reality to the point that it becomes more awkward than just accepting the lack of reality. Sure, some games can pull it off, but a mod for a particular game from someone who wasn't concerned with other issues while being paid to do specific tasks is hardly indicative that all companies have the time and money to add the character's body to first-person view and fix it up to actually look good, and neither does it mean that viewing the body is within every developer's vision for their game and its aesthetics.

Also, in the case of it cluttering the screen is that when you look down it covers part of what you see rather than it just being the environment itself. In an FPS where every second counts, you would probably want that extra fraction of a second when looking down, rather than someone being concealed for a short amount of time by your giant chest (this is especially try for games that only allow crouching rather than prone). Not to mention, I can't even imagine the complaints people would be able to come up with regarding it. Also, in a game where you're collecting items, many people just want to be focused on the items rather than seeing their burly muscles. Once again, it depends on the game's purpose. Sure, it is nice that mods exist for people who want to appreciate their character's body every time they look down, but that does't mean it is the direction every game should go.

 

[Eve Charm]

Not having to restart the game every time I want to plug in my gamepad or headset would be nice. Other then that more steam games using the steam workshop, I know there are mods for your game, let people post them in a good safe place.

 

[The White Hunter]

FOV adjustment in first person games should be god damned standard by now.

 

[oversoon]

I don't see why affecting what is visible in this way inherently makes it need to be a certain kind of movement system. It's purely visual and it would add the same thing regardless of how you move. Also, what extra space do you mean? The only difference is when you look straight down you see your body instead of nothing. It doesn't clutter the screen at all or get in the way of anything.

The problem is that if the movement doesn't behave similarly to that of how people move, then it would seem awkward to anyone who happens to look down while moving, which is hardly a rare ordeal in first-person games. That's not even beginning to go into how you have to ensure there are no graphical issues with it, such as it flashing in-and-out randomly or having your weapons clipping through the body. The end result is that you want to avoid the uncanny valley, where you get close enough to reality but not exactly at reality to the point that it becomes more awkward than just accepting the lack of reality. Sure, some games can pull it off, but a mod for a particular game from someone who wasn't concerned with other issues while being paid to do specific tasks is hardly indicative that all companies have the time and money to add the character's body to first-person view and fix it up to actually look good, and neither does it mean that viewing the body is within every developer's vision for their game and its aesthetics.

Also, in the case of it cluttering the screen is that when you look down it covers part of what you see rather than it just being the environment itself. In an FPS where every second counts, you would probably want that extra fraction of a second when looking down, rather than someone being concealed for a short amount of time by your giant chest (this is especially try for games that only allow crouching rather than prone). Not to mention, I can't even imagine the complaints people would be able to come up with regarding it. Also, in a game where you're collecting items, many people just want to be focused on the items rather than seeing their burly muscles. Once again, it depends on the game's purpose. Sure, it is nice that mods exist for people who want to appreciate their character's body every time they look down, but that does't mean it is the direction every game should go.

You're explaining why these are issues if they exist. I'm saying, what makes them have to exist? If the movement doesn't behave similarly, sure, I get it ... But it does. Outlast is a good example. I was playing it for a good 10 minutes before I even noticed it has this feature. That's because it in no way took from my ability to control the character. Again it only affects looking STRAIGHT down, and it blocks nothing from your view, except like an inch of what would be behind your legs, which you shouldn't be able to see anyway.

If some specific game has a specific reason for not wanting it, that's fine. I just think it should be more standard in the almost total majority of games it would in no way negatively affect.

 

[Evonisia]

I'd just like to say that the OT example has been around since at least Halo 2 (which was 2004 and Sixth Gen) and while it does make production easier to not render the legs/chest, it's still something which we've been able to do for (at least) nearly a decade now.

What I think should be standard is the health bar. I know they used to be back in the 90's and early 00's but nowadays we just have to cross our fingers that we don't die. It doesn't even have to be a bar, Gears of War has an omen which gets darker and thicker as you lose health, and Battlefield has a percentage of health. Neither of them are definite indicators of how many bullets you can take but it's nice to have an idea rather than rush on ahead and die. Call of Duty just has jam on the screen which doesn't progress beyond 50% health, and that's beyond irritating. Halo used to just cross your fingers once the shield expired but as of Halo 3: ODST they've brought Health bars back. Let us bring back those glorious indicators of life!

 

[oversoon]

I'd just like to say that the OT example has been around since at least Halo 2 (which was 2004 and Sixth Gen) and while it does make production easier to not render the legs/chest, it's still something which we've been able to do for (at least) nearly a decade now.

What I think should be standard is the health bar. I know they used to be back in the 90's and early 00's but nowadays we just have to cross our fingers that we don't die. It doesn't even have to be a bar, Gears of War has an omen which gets darker and thicker as you lose health, and Battlefield has a percentage of health. Neither of them are definite indicators of how many bullets you can take but it's nice to have an idea rather than rush on ahead and die. Call of Duty just has jam on the screen which doesn't progress beyond 50% health, and that's beyond irritating. Halo used to just cross your fingers once the shield expired but as of Halo 3: ODST they've brought Health bars back. Let us bring back those glorious indicators of life!

[/quote]

The fact that it has been around and we have been able to do it for so long is exactly my point. It's doable and I wish I saw it more. That's all. Also, Halo 2 just did legs. Several do legs these days, but not full body.

Anyway, I can't agree more about the freaking jelly screen. I don't have an inherent problem with regen health, but I do like to know where my health stands a bit more precisely and without going blind... This would make me want the fading HUD even more, but I definitely agree.

 

[Zipa]

FOV sliders , seriously a narrow FOV can cause medical issues so this should be a must for PC.

Good ports, which ever way they are going. There is no excuse to release a shitty port in this day and age when a amateur modder can do a better job than a paid development team. Props to Blizzard as their Diablo 3 port to console was excellent and enhanced the game.

borderless window option for all games, this should be a standard on PC now as many people want to alt tab to their desktop without closing a game. Plus many people have some form of multi monitor setups and not having borderless windows can really screw this up.

Remappable keys there is no reason why this feature shouldn't be standard on PC games apart from lazy devs.